Let the speculation begin. http://sports.espn.go.com/​nba/​news/​story?​id=5715816If they weren't getting the arena in Brooklyn, the Nets would have been an option. You can't get rid of the Clippers, just because they are such a punchline. Memphis has to lead the list, and then you start wondering if it is 2 or 4 teams that could potentially go. Is Stern willing to give up his toehold in Canada, since it seems players would crawl on broken glass not to get put into the higher tax bracket?Now, what happened to the David Stern who spent so much time for the past decade talking about NBA expansion to Europe?

No chance they contract the Clippers, because for as odd as it might sound, they're actually one of the few profitable teams in the league. Of course, it's because Donald Sterling is such a cheapskate, but still, you can't contract a team that's actually making money.

If they're looking to contract 4 teams, I'd imagine it's Happy Trails to Memphis and Toronto, but picking the other two teams gets a lot dicier after that. Who goes after that? The Sixers? The Blazers? The Cavs? (Just so history can look back and say that LeBron's departure LITERALLY killed the team?)

I'm in favor of contraction if it'll prevent a lockout, but picking those teams is much tougher than it looks.

From everything I hear the Pacers have to paper the hell out of their arena which would make them a candidate. Memphis would be an obvious suspect, as would Toronto. I'd think Philly would be too large a market to vacate.

That said, I have a nitpick that arose when Selig was first twirling his mustache about this subject years ago: you don't contract a team, you contract a league. To contract is to make smaller, the opposite of expanding. You wouldn't say "the NBA expanded Memphis", nor would you say "the NBA contracted Memphis." You would say "the NBA expanded, adding Memphis" or "the NBA expanded to Memphis," and thus you say "the NBA contracted, eliminating Memphis" or similar. I know thanks to Selig it has entered sports parlance in this fashion, but it bugs the hell out of me.

Toronto and Philly are both big markets that the NBA doesn't want to lose --- I can't imagine Philly losing its team, that can't possibly be on the table. The Cavs don't have a lot going for them at the moment but if they go, there goes the NBA's foothold in all of Ohio. If only two teams get the ax, I suspect it would be the Grizzlies (natural choice) and the Hornets.

You'd think the NBA would look into relocation before they'd actually cut teams. Why not just put struggling franchises in Seattle or St. Louis? Or a market like Oklahoma City, where the NBA is the biggest game in town by default thanks to a lack of other pro sporting options?

Originally posted by Big Bad Why not just put struggling franchises in Seattle or St. Louis? Or a market like Oklahoma City, where the NBA is the biggest game in town by default thanks to a lack of other pro sporting options?

A struggling team in Seattle (the Supersonics) just moved to Oklahoma City (the Thunder) in 2008.

-- 2006 Time magazine Person of the Year ---- July 2009 Ordained Reverend --

Originally posted by Big BadYou'd think the NBA would look into relocation before they'd actually cut teams. Why not just put struggling franchises in Seattle or St. Louis? Or a market like Oklahoma City, where the NBA is the biggest game in town by default thanks to a lack of other pro sporting options?

That's what I was thinking. I mean, wasn't the point of having the all-star game in Las Vegas to see if they could possibly sustain a team over there?

I think this is mostly hot air coming from Stern. Getting rid of 4 teams? Cutting salaries as much as 33%? While he's gotten a raise to at least 10 million recently? I know he wants to cut down on costs, but I don't think it'll be as drastic as he's making it now. Cutting it by a third is insane almost no matter what the job.

Originally posted by Big BadWhy not just put struggling franchises in Seattle or St. Louis?

St. Louis would not at this point support an NBA team. That doesn't make your point invalid; you're right, that's a better option than killing them first. But don't figure Mound City in on the conversation.

Originally posted by Big BadYou'd think the NBA would look into relocation before they'd actually cut teams.

Unless I miss my guess, this is less of a plan and more of a bargaining ploy on Stern's part. Contraction is a lot easier in the abstract than in reality. Unless the economics are so screwed up that there are literally owners begging Stern to let them fold, the owners would have to make some big outlays to 'buy out' whichever of their fellow owners are getting contracted.

IIRC Selig had Carl Pohlad willing to drop the Twins, but only for a 'fair price' on the value of the club that he was running just barely more generously than the dame from "Major League".

It's the old story..

Owners: We need to cut salaries, we're losing money.

Players: Open up your books.

Owners: STFU.

Until there's an independent audit showing massive losses, or teams actually folding, I'm guessing that they can generally afford what they've been paying. And the next contract is just a question of who gets how much profit.

Originally posted by Big Bad Why not just put struggling franchises in Seattle or St. Louis? Or a market like Oklahoma City, where the NBA is the biggest game in town by default thanks to a lack of other pro sporting options?

A struggling team in Seattle (the Supersonics) just moved to Oklahoma City (the Thunder) in 2008.

A massive oversimplification. More accurately, a team with an owner that said he needed a new arena in a city that wouldn't give him one plus a lease that was due to expire at the end of 2010 was sold to an owner from another city who was more than happy to take advantage of the combination of all of those factors to come to an agreement with the city to buy out the last year of the lease and move the (now) homeless team to his own hometown.

The Sonics would still be in Seattle if not for the pending expiration of the lease, otherwise they would have been tied to the KeyArena today. Well done, Seattle. *golfclap*

Holy fuck shit motherfucker shit. Read comics. Fuck shit shit fuck shit I sold out when I did my job. Fuck fuck fuck shit fuck. Sorry had to do it....

*snip*

Revenge of the Sith = one thumb up from me. Fuck shit. I want to tittie fuck your ass. -- The Guinness. to Cerebus

If Stern were to contract some teams, I would also like to suggest that each conference have 6 playoff teams instead of 8.

Granted, we get the rare playoff series where an 8 seed knocks off a 1 seed but I just think with 30 teams and 16 total teams making the playoffs, it somewhat makes getting to the playoffs a little diluted. 6 teams would be better, especially if contraction does happen.